Quote:
Originally Posted by spider_monkey_b
Thanks for clarifying commish. But, just to make sure I understand this 100% let's look at the example of SP Hal Newhouser.
When I import him, it shows something like 12/18/10 ratings, and that's importing him during his MVP seasons.
He is a 7x All Star, 2x AL MVP, 2x Pitcher of the Year, 207 wins, 1796 K's.
Now, I'm not asking you to tell me exact ratings, but to clarify for myself and the rest of the guys...your post above means that someone like Newhouser, who has mediocre ratings upon import, will be manually adjusted so those ratings better reflect him to be studly....along the lines of 18's across the board (give or take a bit).
Is that the correct understanding?
I had originally believed you were going to be primarily using in-game ratings as the basis for these guys.
|
I am helping Mike create the players. I'll try to explain on Newhouser and others. For the most part, the guys are at slightly above career number for ratings but we are trying to adjust for era. Newhouser is one of the hardest examples because of when he played. Just about everyone we expect to be chosen will have played into the mid to later 1960s or onward and frankly its easier to compare Willie Mays and Junior Griffey to Matt Kemp than Newhouser to say Zach Greinke. Just less adjustments needs to figure out.
When you imported Newhouser your getting his stats pulled into the current world with zero era adjustment. What i am doing with his ratings is compared them to his eras peers and trying to adjust that to the current league.
For example in his time he lead the league in K/9's four times and nine times was in the top ten. Where if you just used straight importing he is merely average in K's. The reasoning is different eras play differently. K/9 were lower because of more innings pitched (which means you saved some on velocity and pitching to contact), more emphasis on not striking out, etc.
In short, what i am trying to do is compare apples to apples- IE what Newhouser might do in today's MLB statwise, not just plug in what he did in the 1940s and throw those numbers into a 2012 sim. Newhouser would very well strikeout more today because the game is different than his era. In his day he was a strikeout guy, and should be in this league (ignoring any debate on guys being bigger, more athletic, etc today). If i had to guess, probably a 16 or maybe 17 on stuff.
A more common and clear example is stamina. If you just plug in straight imports. 1970s and before especially would have crazy stamina compared to today but its not like anyone in the current MLB would let Koufax pitch 350 innings. No one has hit 300 even since 1980. So why base his stamina off of it. Again, i am trying to make it apples to apples comparisons. So i see how often he lead (or was close) his league in innings pitched to give him a modern stamina similar to say Halladay instead of just plugging in the 350 innings or whatever the import says. Most these guys are studs and tend to be 18-20 for stamina. We are using a 1-20 scale in this league.
In most cases, ratings will look like you expect they would.
Brett is a .310, 40 doubles, 20 homer guy
Aaron is a .310, 40 homers type of guy
Bonds was unique in that his career really was two distant parts. He is a hybrid of his speed years and power years. .304, 40 homers but great D and speed.
Here are examples of players in the league- i have made 12 hitters so far.
Contact leaders:
Boggs 19 Historical
Gwynn 19 Historical
M Cabrera 18
Carew 18 Historical
Braun 17
Hamilton 17
Kemp 17
Mauer 17
Aaron, Mays, F Robinson, G Brett, Bonds, Griffey, R Henderson, E Mathews, F Thomas who are made are not on that list. Thomas at 16 is the next highest with eight regular current MLB players. Aaron, Brett, Mays are at 15 with most the other .300 type hitters you find in real life. No one gets a big spike just for being a historical. Of the 12 players i mentioned- Only Aaron, Mays, Bonds are five star players right now. I assume Mantle, Ted Williams and others would join that five star list if requested. In short, your historical isn't a guaranteed top 30 player just because he was a historical.
What i would suggest for those joining or thinking of it. Pick guys you like instead of worrying if he is slightly better than someone else. Say you like Barry Larkin but think Frank Robinson might be rated higher on the Reds. Don't stress trying to figure out if someone might be a 1/2 star better. Its not a given they'll play better anyway and its more important you enjoy the league.